WITHIN THE PERIOD TO MEET THE DEADLINE: CZECH NEAR-SYNONYMS DOBA AND LHŮTA AND THEIR ENGLISH EQUIVALENTS

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61989592%3A15210%2F16%3A33163400" target="_blank" >RIV/61989592:15210/16:33163400 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cl/issue/view/553" target="_blank" >http://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cl/issue/view/553</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/cl.2016.27.4" target="_blank" >10.14746/cl.2016.27.4</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

WITHIN THE PERIOD TO MEET THE DEADLINE: CZECH NEAR-SYNONYMS DOBA AND LHŮTA AND THEIR ENGLISH EQUIVALENTS

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

The Czech Civil Code has recently introduced differentiation between two terms denoting a period of time: lhůta and doba. Both of these terms are used, often interchangeably, in ordinary Czech language and are thus susceptible to failure by translators to be recognized as terms. It is believed that the definitions provided by the draftsmen of the said code do not describe the difference in meaning sufficiently for non-lawyers to understand (cf. Goźdź-Roszkowski, 2013: 100). Therefore, this paper aims at describing the difference in meaning of these terms on the basis of a qualitative analysis of their collocational patterns and collocational profile, as used in the wording of the said law. The second part of the paper consists of an analysis of potential English equivalents (time limit, period, deadline, time) and their collocates as used in legislation drafted in English. The analysis is based on a corpus compiled of the Czech Civil Code and a comparable corpus of civil legislation drafted in English. The findings of the analysis will outline the strategies available to translators dealing with temporal expressions at the Czech-English interface.

Název v anglickém jazyce

WITHIN THE PERIOD TO MEET THE DEADLINE: CZECH NEAR-SYNONYMS DOBA AND LHŮTA AND THEIR ENGLISH EQUIVALENTS

Popis výsledku anglicky

The Czech Civil Code has recently introduced differentiation between two terms denoting a period of time: lhůta and doba. Both of these terms are used, often interchangeably, in ordinary Czech language and are thus susceptible to failure by translators to be recognized as terms. It is believed that the definitions provided by the draftsmen of the said code do not describe the difference in meaning sufficiently for non-lawyers to understand (cf. Goźdź-Roszkowski, 2013: 100). Therefore, this paper aims at describing the difference in meaning of these terms on the basis of a qualitative analysis of their collocational patterns and collocational profile, as used in the wording of the said law. The second part of the paper consists of an analysis of potential English equivalents (time limit, period, deadline, time) and their collocates as used in legislation drafted in English. The analysis is based on a corpus compiled of the Czech Civil Code and a comparable corpus of civil legislation drafted in English. The findings of the analysis will outline the strategies available to translators dealing with temporal expressions at the Czech-English interface.

Druh

J_ost - Ostatní články v recenzovaných periodicích

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

60202 - Specific languages

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach

Rok uplatnění

2016

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Comparative Legilinguistics (International Journal for Legal Communication)

ISSN

2080-5926

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

2016

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

27

Stát vydavatele periodika

PL - Polská republika

Počet stran výsledku

24

Strana od-do

49-72

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—